Philip Rivers is retiring from the NFL

[EastStreet 9,235]

1 hour ago, FourthandOne said:

One low cost solution is to sign Andy Dalton and draft a rookie QB. 

  

Andy, welcome to the board. Great first post.

[HectorRoberts 752]

Well I guess it’s Jacoby time again

[smittywerb 171]

21 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:

We had a ton of draft capital to move up last year and Love was right there. Last draft might of been a huge mistake for Ballard.

 

You say that even with the great production we got from those rookies?

[smittywerb 171]

21 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:

I think you might be right. Saves cap space. Just take the lumps for a year. But I have a bad feeling Jacoby will get another chance.

 

I see that also.  He has a great relationship with the team and staff.  I can honestly see this happening if they aren't sold on Eason or can't make any moves.  I wouldn't like this move if we overpay however.

[jvan1973 5,349]

9 hours ago, CR91 said:

This is a turning point for the colts. Imo, whatever Ballard decides to do now rather that's trade for a vet, Move up in the draft, or go with Eason will decide the future of this team.

The short term future unless they trade a kings ransom to trade or trade up. 

[cdgacoltsfan 573]

5 hours ago, HectorRoberts said:

Well I guess it’s Jacoby time again

[LJpalmbeacher2 1,794]

16 hours ago, King Colt said:

 What part of the players "stop developing after about year 4"? Ask Nick Foles or Joe Flacco or perhaps, in contrast Tom Brady.

 

In Brady's case he wasn't developing,  the footballs were getting lighter for him. 

[Arodgers12 320]

God bless Rivers. Loved watching him play. I wish him the best.

[LJpalmbeacher2 1,794]

11 hours ago, FourthandOne said:

One low cost solution is to sign Andy Dalton and draft a rookie QB. 

  

 

Why do the colts need a "low cost solution" ?

[Arodgers12 320]

1 minute ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Why do the colts need a "low cost solution" ?

You guys should get Wentz.

[King Colt 942]

Right now the Colts are missing one piece QB to win the SB. The Bills are rated as among the best in the NFL and the Colts played them one to one if not out played them all day but lost the game. They do not need a 5 Star QB just a skilled one that can move.

[Restored 264]

On 1/20/2021 at 12:48 PM, Lancer1 said:

Eason may not be ready to start, but he's been in our system for a year and I'd rather kick his tires instead of bringing in yet another brand spanking new QB and hoping they can pick it up quickly - there's only 1 Philip Rivers, and now he's gone. 

 

Who knows though, perhaps Philip can lure AC down to Alabama to coach up his lineman for awhile!

I really don’t think the Colts can afford to experiment with Eason too much at this point. Their window to win with the talent they have without having to pay a premium is now.

 

If Eason was a Justin Herbert-type player that got drafted in the first round to eventually start then that’d be different but he simply isn’t ready from what it sounds like and he may never be.

[Restored 264]

6 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

The short term future unless they trade a kings ransom to trade or trade up. 

I don’t think it’ll have to be a kings ransom. Colin Cowherd did an interesting breakdown of the trades the Bills, Chiefs and Texans did and it wasn’t an insane amount of picks to move up and get their QBs.

[jvan1973 5,349]

22 minutes ago, Restored said:

I don’t think it’ll have to be a kings ransom. Colin Cowherd did an interesting breakdown of the trades the Bills, Chiefs and Texans did and it wasn’t an insane amount of picks to move up and get their QBs.

How far did they move up?  

[Restored 264]

5 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

How far did they move up?  

Bills from 21 to 7.

 

Ravens from 52 to 32.

 

Texans from 25 to 12.

 

Chiefs from 27 to 10.

[jvan1973 5,349]

1 minute ago, Restored said:

Bills from 21 to 7.

 

Ravens from 52 to 32.

 

Texans from 25 to 12.

 

Chiefs from 27 to 10.

Our move would have to be similar to the bills.    We will see.   I have confidence Ballard is covering all his bases

[Chloe6124 9,820]

We can make the jump the question will be is the guy we want still there. Will other teams offer more to move up. There are so many QB needy teams.

[shasta519 2,829]

On 1/20/2021 at 3:58 PM, Nickster said:

 

But I see part of it differently.  We have money to pay a vet for the next two years no matter what we do.  We have upwards of 70 mill in space now. 

 

In a couple of years, we are going to owe big time money and proabably will need a cheaper option.

Were you for keeping PR if he hadn't retired?  

 

I agree in principle that you are what your QB is.  I'd just like to see us take a run at this thing this year and next.

I didn’t want Rivers back...because it didn’t move anything forward. And I don’t see them winning a SB with him. I could have been interested in Rivers mentoring a rookie...but that would have taken a large chunk of cap.

 

If the Colts get the pick right...then they will have to pay that QB. But that is years away...and gives them plenty of time to maximize a competitive window. The roster calculus will change...but that is a problem for another day. 

[NewColtsFan 8,371]

17 hours ago, King Colt said:

Right now the Colts are missing one piece QB to win the SB. The Bills are rated as among the best in the NFL and the Colts played them one to one if not out played them all day but lost the game. They do not need a 5 Star QB just a skilled one that can move.

One missing piece?    Huh?

 

Besides a top quality quarterback, we’re also missing the following...

 

— A top left tackle

— A top pass rushing defensive end

— A top wide receiver

— Better play at corner

 

Sorry, but your post is a head scratcher. 

[life long 185]

3 hours ago, shasta519 said:

I didn’t want Rivers back...because it didn’t move anything forward. And I don’t see them winning a SB with him. I could have been interested in Rivers mentoring a rookie...but that would have taken a large chunk of cap.

 

If the Colts get the pick right...then they will have to pay that QB. But that is years away...and gives them plenty of time to maximize a competitive window. The roster calculus will change...but that is a problem for another day. 

Id say going from not making the playoffs to making it does count as forward progress...

[Colt.45 345]

19 minutes ago, life long said:

Id say going from not making the playoffs to making it does count as forward progress...

I think shasta probably meant it wouldn't move anything forward next season.

I agree with that sentiment however I disagree with the notion that this team couldn't have won a SB with Rivers, they had everything needed to do that this year. In these playoffs, I've not seen a team that the Colts couldn't have hung with. I'd argue that the defense needs more pass rush from the edges but this team was in it.

[life long 185]

Just now, Colt.45 said:

I think shasta probably meant it wouldn't move anything forward next season.

I agree with that sentiment however I disagree with the notion that this team couldn't have won a SB with Rivers, they had everything needed to do that this year. In these playoffs, I've not seen a team that the Colts couldn't have hung with. I'd argue that the defense needs more pass rush from the edges but this team was in it.

You are probably right but he said didn't not wouldn't. 

[Bolts2Colts 303]

On 1/20/2021 at 11:34 AM, 07dleigh said:

This was music to my ears, frankly. Forces our hand. Realllllllly curious to see what CB does. This is oddly exciting... I feel like I shouldn't be excited lol.

Hopefully it doesn’t force Colts to sign someone like Marcus Mariota and over-reach in the draft while mortgaging the future. 
 

Zach Hicks predicts the Colts will sign Andy Dalton and trade up for QB. 
 

I think it really puts the Colts in a bind and reduces their leverage in negotiations. They will be perceived as desperate especially knowing Eason might not be ready to be a back-up.

And if Eason isn’t the future QB1, Colts wasted that opportunity to learn behind Rivers on him rather than the future QB1. 
 

I’m kind of in shock that Rivers retired. Around week 13 he seemed really confident that he would want to play again. Didn’t hesitate when asking the question. Then after the playoffs he said he would either retire or return to Colts and that it was in Gods hands.  Then he suddenly retired a week later.  
 

I wonder what transpired. I wonder if it was the Colts being non-committal about re-signing him. Just as Ballard wanted Rivers to be 100% sure, maybe Rivers only wanted to go back if Colts were 100% sure they wanted him. 
 

 

[Chloe6124 9,820]

If we have to resort to some retread like Dalton that would be very disappointing. How do you even get excited about that. Unless they draft up and have someone behind him we can look forward too. 

[Nickster 836]

7 hours ago, shasta519 said:

I didn’t want Rivers back...because it didn’t move anything forward. And I don’t see them winning a SB with him. I could have been interested in Rivers mentoring a rookie...but that would have taken a large chunk of cap.

 

If the Colts get the pick right...then they will have to pay that QB. But that is years away...and gives them plenty of time to maximize a competitive window. The roster calculus will change...but that is a problem for another day. 

I totally agree with what you are saying in the long term.  I can't see a rooke QB that we could get that I would be hopeful that he could lead the team next year as well as PR or another vet would.  I would suspect even Lawrence would struggle.  

 

It's just a personal preference for me to see them try to win now.  I think they are pretty close Shasta.  There is no one we were uncompetitive with.  And witht he exception of the 2nd TN game, we were within a play or two of winning our other losses.  

 

I think this team is in a pretty unique situation.  I cannot think off of the top of my head that a competive team in it's QBs prime lost it's starting QB like we did.  I can't think of a career ending injury, free agency, anything.  We are going into our 2nd draft after Lucks sudden departure.  This team was drafted and designed to win now with Luck.  I just think that a vet gives us the best opportunity to win now. 

 

But I do understand the prudence of developing our own QB, I just don' think our team is set up to be competive right away with a rookie.  Namely, we don't have that kind of defense that most other rookie playoff QBs have had.  Wilson, Big Ben, Sanchise all had dominating defenses.  I think Sanchise and Ben are the only QBs to win more than one playoff game in their rookie years in NFL history.  There are other players that have made and won a game in the playoffs like Luck and I think Marino, but we aren't getting a Luck or a Marino in the draft in all likelihood.

 

This is a very tough, and pretty unique situation to be in for management.  It will be intersting to see how it shakes out.

 

 

[King Colt 942]

6 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

One missing piece?    Huh?

 

Besides a top quality quarterback, we’re also missing the following...

 

— A top left tackle

— A top pass rushing defensive end

— A top wide receiver

— Better play at corner

 

Sorry, but your post is a head scratcher. 

Perhaps you should switch to Head & Shoulders but if you think the Colts did not have advance against the Bills because of poor playing you are scratching somewhere other than your scalp.

[King Colt 942]

On 1/21/2021 at 9:24 AM, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

In Brady's case he wasn't developing,  the footballs were getting lighter for him. 

Lined up for at tenth Super Bowl not bad for a QB that many here said was not as good as Manning

[richard pallo 2,573]

37 minutes ago, Bolts2Colts said:

Hopefully it doesn’t force Colts to sign someone like Marcus Mariota and over-reach in the draft while mortgaging the future. 
 

Zach Hicks predicts the Colts will sign Andy Dalton and trade up for QB. 
 

I think it really puts the Colts in a bind and reduces their leverage in negotiations. They will be perceived as desperate especially knowing Eason might not be ready to be a back-up.

And if Eason isn’t the future QB1, Colts wasted that opportunity to learn behind Rivers on him rather than the future QB1. 
 

I’m kind of in shock that Rivers retired. Around week 13 he seemed really confident that he would want to play again. Didn’t hesitate when asking the question. Then after the playoffs he said he would either retire or return to Colts and that it was in Gods hands.  Then he suddenly retired a week later.  
 

I wonder what transpired. I wonder if it was the Colts being non-committal about re-signing him. Just as Ballard wanted Rivers to be 100% sure, maybe Rivers only wanted to go back if Colts were 100% sure they wanted him. 
 

 

I think teams realize we are in a bind.  That's because we are and everybody knows it.  But desperate No.  Houston is praying they can keep Watson happy and heaven forbid he decides to force a trade to us.  The same for Stafford.  He could force a trade as well.  Dalton, Winston, JB, are just a few QB's that will be out there if preferred choices fail to materialize.  I think we will be the preferred destination for all of the FA QB's and all of the veteran QB's under contract that have a chance of being traded from their current teams and those teams know it.  I expect our QB search will move along very quickly now.  If we are going to acquire a new veteran QB to be our starter, which I think we will, I think we will have him on board by the start of FA.  The quicker that position is finalized the quicker our attention can turn to other FA's and the draft.   Can't really do much of anything until we know who our QB is and how much cap space to allow for the position.  

[shasta519 2,829]

8 minutes ago, Nickster said:

I totally agree with what you are saying in the long term.  I can't see a rooke QB that we could get that I would be hopeful that he could lead the team next year as well as PR or another vet would.  I would suspect even Lawrence would struggle.  

 

It's just a personal preference for me to see them try to win now.  I think they are pretty close Shasta.  There is no one we were uncompetitive with.  And witht he exception of the 2nd TN game, we were within a play or two of winning our other losses.  

 

I think this team is in a pretty unique situation.  I cannot think off of the top of my head that a competive team in it's QBs prime lost it's starting QB like we did.  I can't think of a career ending injury, free agency, anything.  We are going into our 2nd draft after Lucks sudden departure.  This team was drafted and designed to win now with Luck.  I just think that a vet gives us the best opportunity to win now. 

 

But I do understand the prudence of developing our own QB, I just don' think our team is set up to be competive right away with a rookie.  Namely, we don't have that kind of defense that most other rookie playoff QBs have had.  Wilson, Big Ben, Sanchise all had dominating defenses.  I think Sanchise and Ben are the only QBs to win more than one playoff game in their rookie years in NFL history.  There are other players that have made and won a game in the playoffs like Luck and I think Marino, but we aren't getting a Luck or a Marino in the draft in all likelihood.

 

This is a very tough, and pretty unique situation to be in for management.  It will be intersting to see how it shakes out.

 

 

 

I don't necessarily agree with this. That's not to say it will be easy...nothing about roster construction. But while the exact circumstances for how the Colts got here might be unique...the vast majority of teams have faced the challenge of addressing QB long-term at some point (sometimes multiple times). So I don't necessarily see that as a unique challenge.

 

I would argue that being able to build up around QB has put them in a tremendous position to be able to make a smooth transition and start competing right away with a rookie QB.

 

But not having the benefit of a top pick does make it tougher. But we have seen teams in a similar scenario overcome that (KC, BUF, HOU) through trade-ups. That's the only real downside I see...is the sacrifice that will have to be made. But IMO...it's a no-brainer for how to proceed. 

[shasta519 2,829]

3 hours ago, life long said:

Id say going from not making the playoffs to making it does count as forward progress...

 

Yeah...I didn't mean there wasn't progress this past season...I was talking about for next season. I think we saw this team's ceiling with Rivers. But also...bringing him back didn't serve the QB position long-term (unless they had still drafted a rookie).

[Nickster 836]

5 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

I don't necessarily agree with this. That's not to say it will be easy...nothing about roster construction. But while the exact circumstances for how the Colts got here might be unique...the vast majority of teams have faced the challenge of addressing QB long-term at some point (sometimes multiple times). So I don't necessarily see that as a unique challenge.

 

I would argue that being able to build up around QB has put them in a tremendous position to be able to make a smooth transition and start competing right away with a rookie QB.

 

But not having the benefit of a top pick does make it tougher. But we have seen teams in a similar scenario overcome that (KC, BUF, HOU) through trade-ups. That's the only real downside I see...is the sacrifice that will have to be made. But IMO...it's a no-brainer for how to proceed. 

 

We shall see. 

[shasta519 2,829]

1 hour ago, Bolts2Colts said:

Hopefully it doesn’t force Colts to sign someone like Marcus Mariota and over-reach in the draft while mortgaging the future. 
 

Zach Hicks predicts the Colts will sign Andy Dalton and trade up for QB. 
 

I think it really puts the Colts in a bind and reduces their leverage in negotiations. They will be perceived as desperate especially knowing Eason might not be ready to be a back-up.

And if Eason isn’t the future QB1, Colts wasted that opportunity to learn behind Rivers on him rather than the future QB1. 
 

I’m kind of in shock that Rivers retired. Around week 13 he seemed really confident that he would want to play again. Didn’t hesitate when asking the question. Then after the playoffs he said he would either retire or return to Colts and that it was in Gods hands.  Then he suddenly retired a week later.  
 

I wonder what transpired. I wonder if it was the Colts being non-committal about re-signing him. Just as Ballard wanted Rivers to be 100% sure, maybe Rivers only wanted to go back if Colts were 100% sure they wanted him. 
 

 

 

The Colts have plenty of leverage in trade talks IF they are willing to go there. But I don't think teams are going to look at the Colts as a team they can't take advantage of. Ballard is seen a smart, prudent GM who is cool under fire...and teams seem to really like dealing with him (from what we have seen). One team in particular that really likes Ballard...is the team that has the #2 pick.

[shasta519 2,829]

52 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

If we have to resort to some retread like Dalton that would be very disappointing. How do you even get excited about that. Unless they draft up and have someone behind him we can look forward too. 

 

I don't see a scenario where Dalton is the QB1 heading into next season.

[2006Coltsbestever 21,909]

1 minute ago, shasta519 said:

 

I don't see a scenario where Dalton is the QB1 heading into next season.

I hope not, that would almost be as bad as Wentz as the QB with his ridiculous contract.

[Chloe6124 9,820]

If the colts have their eye on any FA WR they can probably forget about that since this QB situation is so unsettled.

 

[shasta519 2,829]

1 minute ago, Chloe6124 said:

If the colts have their eye on any FA WR they can probably forget about that since this QB situation is so unsettled.

 

 

They have the cap space (right now)...which is infinitely more important. I would think the Colts are seen as a team on the cusp...and attractive to any position.

[2006Coltsbestever 21,909]

Just now, Chloe6124 said:

If the colts have their eye on any FA WR they can probably forget about that since this QB situation is so unsettled.

 

If we can trade for Stafford (which will take a 1st rounder), we can still maybe pick up a guy like Robinson which will be pricey but Ballard could still do it and re-sign TY for 10 Mill a year or so. TY made 14.5 mill last year so we would save 4.5 mill there. We are fine salary cap wise if we did that. I would bring Houston for 10 Mill as well for 1 year. Stafford's contract only has him making 9.5 Mill next year believe it or not. With Rivers and JB off the books that is 40 Mill off the books.

[LJpalmbeacher2 1,794]

2 hours ago, King Colt said:

Lined up for at tenth Super Bowl not bad for a QB that many here said was not as good as Manning

 

...and 10* asterisks. 

[2006Coltsbestever 21,909]

Just now, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

...and 10* asterisks. 

I think Tom is still great but I would take Manning if we were doing an all-time draft over Tom. Manning could take a 1-15 team to 9-7 in 1 season with a mediocre coach, not sure Tom could? Now Tom like Montana are clutch in the playoffs.

[shasta519 2,829]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I hope not, that would almost be as bad as Wentz as the QB with his ridiculous contract.

 

I am not completely against Wentz...but it's not my preference. I actually think Sirianni being in PHI might more easily facilitate that trade.

 

I know people think it's a sign that PHI is going to keep Wentz...but I am not so sure. I know the narrative is that Reich gave a strong recommendation to Wentz (who trusts Reich immensely)...and I am sure he did.  But I can also see Sirianni seeing PHI as an opportunity to blaze his own path with Hurts.